Scholarlink

<p>Over several decades, widespread encroachment of Carolina willow (<i>Salix caroliniana</i>), a native shrub, has occurred in areas historically dominated by herbaceous marsh in the upper St. Johns River basin in Florida, USA. Where fire can no longer be used to control mature willow, use of herbicides may be a viable option for management. We evaluated the response of willow communities to application of imazapyr at a low rate and a mixture of imazapyr and glyphosate at high rates at two locations (C40 and Sweetwater) that varied with respect to understory plant composition, willow stand maturity, and hydrologic conditions. Both low and high application rates of herbicides resulted in complete elimination of willow for four years at both sites. By six years post-treatment, willow began to recover in a few treatment quadrats but still had significantly lower willow cover than in control quadrats at both sites, with the exception of the low imazapyr treatment quadrats at the Sweetwater site. Prior to treatment, understory plant communities were essentially uniform across the treatments within a site. Two to three years after treatment, and the concomitant reduction of willow cover, herbaceous ground cover increased substantially, especially that of forbs and graminoids. However, changes in understory plant assemblages were short-lived and by the last sampling year, there were no dissimilarities in the understory between the control and treatments. At the Sweetwater site, two quadrats had sufficient herbaceous cover to carry a prescribed fire in the sixth-year post-treatment. Considering these results, we recommend using low application rates of imazapyr, rather than high application rates of imazapyr/glyphosate, for willow control due to its nearly equal ability to reduce willow canopy cover and to potentially lower off-target effects. However, an integrated approach using varying herbicides and other control techniques (e.g., mechanical control) may be needed if willow develops a resistance to imazapyr. Furthermore, restoration of appropriate hydrologic and fire regimes should be implemented to prolong the treatment effect and to promote long-term sustainability of herbaceous wetlands.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Management of Carolina willow (Salix caroliniana) with herbicides to restore herbaceous marsh

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2025年3月7日

查看全文
  • Kimberli J. Ponzio,
  • Christy M. Akers,
  • Timothy D. Miller,
  • Randal S. Snyder,
  • Janice D. Miller

摘要

Over several decades, widespread encroachment of Carolina willow (Salix caroliniana), a native shrub, has occurred in areas historically dominated by herbaceous marsh in the upper St. Johns River basin in Florida, USA. Where fire can no longer be used to control mature willow, use of herbicides may be a viable option for management. We evaluated the response of willow communities to application of imazapyr at a low rate and a mixture of imazapyr and glyphosate at high rates at two locations (C40 and Sweetwater) that varied with respect to understory plant composition, willow stand maturity, and hydrologic conditions. Both low and high application rates of herbicides resulted in complete elimination of willow for four years at both sites. By six years post-treatment, willow began to recover in a few treatment quadrats but still had significantly lower willow cover than in control quadrats at both sites, with the exception of the low imazapyr treatment quadrats at the Sweetwater site. Prior to treatment, understory plant communities were essentially uniform across the treatments within a site. Two to three years after treatment, and the concomitant reduction of willow cover, herbaceous ground cover increased substantially, especially that of forbs and graminoids. However, changes in understory plant assemblages were short-lived and by the last sampling year, there were no dissimilarities in the understory between the control and treatments. At the Sweetwater site, two quadrats had sufficient herbaceous cover to carry a prescribed fire in the sixth-year post-treatment. Considering these results, we recommend using low application rates of imazapyr, rather than high application rates of imazapyr/glyphosate, for willow control due to its nearly equal ability to reduce willow canopy cover and to potentially lower off-target effects. However, an integrated approach using varying herbicides and other control techniques (e.g., mechanical control) may be needed if willow develops a resistance to imazapyr. Furthermore, restoration of appropriate hydrologic and fire regimes should be implemented to prolong the treatment effect and to promote long-term sustainability of herbaceous wetlands.